New C parser [patch]

[Richard Guenther]

On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:49:57 -0700, Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 05:03:31PM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> > The only way
> > asm() at top level can continue to make sense is if we pass it along
> > to cgraph, and somehow get cgraph to preserve the global order of
> > functions and asm()s.  [Mind you, I would not have any problem with
> > dropping this feature.]
> 
> False.
> 
> ----
> static void doit(int, int);
> 
> __asm__("\
>         .ent doit       \n\
> doit:                   \n\
>         ...             \n\
>         ret             \n\
>         .end doit       \n\
> ");
> 
> void foo(int a)
> {
>   doit(a, a+1);
> }
> ----
> 
> For non-trivial definitions of doit, this can be extremely useful.
> Glibc, for instance, uses this in ld.so.

Why doesn't it use an assembly file then?  You seem to gain nothing
by using gcc inline assembly this way.

Richard.